Scripture vs. punctuation in translations.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Hi ALL

Quote (Paladin @ July 03 2009,13:31)

I considered when I read it, that it is an agreement to NOT debate. Am I wrong? Anyone? Well, anyone except SOA.

Isn't this classified as an “ad hominem fallacy”?

More name calling? Is this a diversion from the questions concerning “The Christian Pioneer” again?

These are my comments on the debate, time and date stamped which PD doesn't supply…

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 27 2009,15:43)

I am not the slightest bit interested, mainly because you will make claims that the scriptures are corrupted by biased men, and it is not because I cannot make a valid argument about Biblical Monotheism in scriptures as being a Plural unity. Trinitarianism is the only view that takes all Biblical data without special pleading and shows that God is Plural yet One.

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 27 2009,23:34)

I didn’t expect you to be surprised, I have explained my reasons. I tell you what though, I will agree to such a debate if you agree that we just use the versions of the Bible found on Biblegateway.com and Blueletterbible.org and just accept the written scriptures as they are, and just compare scripture to scripture.

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 27 2009,23:34)

That is because I have dealt with people like you before and they always end up refuting the translations or claiming corruption or bias when presented with unambiguous truth that Jesus is God. So you want the debate fine, then we go by the rules that I mentioned and stick to the scriptures by letting them interpret themselves, but I will wait in line behind Thinker.

How can it be any clearer that I would accept his debat based on the rules that I said. Since he is so adament about Jack following his premise whats wrong with him following mine?

And since I said I will wait in line behind thinker, well he must consider that as a no. LOL

WJ

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 03 2009,14:10)

Hi ALL Quote (Paladin @ July 03 2009,13:31) I considered when I read it, that it is an agreement to NOT debate. Am I wrong? Anyone? Well, anyone except SOA. Isn't this classified as an “ad hominem fallacy”? More name calling? Is this a diversion from the questions concerning “The Christian Pioneer” again? These are my comments on the debate, time and date stamped which PD doesn't supply… Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 27 2009,15:43) I am not the slightest bit interested, mainly because you will make claims that the scriptures are corrupted by biased men, and it is not because I cannot make a valid argument about Biblical Monotheism in scriptures as being a Plural unity. Trinitarianism is the only view that takes all Biblical data without special pleading and shows that God is Plural yet One. Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 27 2009,23:34) I didn’t expect you to be surprised, I have explained my reasons. I tell you what though, I will agree to such a debate if you agree that we just use the versions of the Bible found on Biblegateway.com and Blueletterbible.org and just accept the written scriptures as they are, and just compare scripture to scripture. Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 27 2009,23:34) That is because I have dealt with people like you before and they always end up refuting the translations or claiming corruption or bias when presented with unambiguous truth that Jesus is God. So you want the debate fine, then we go by the rules that I mentioned and stick to the scriptures by letting them interpret themselves, but I will wait in line behind Thinker. How can it be any clearer that I would accept his debat based on the rules that I said. Since he is so adament about Jack following his premise whats wrong with him following mine? And since I said I will wait in line behind thinker, well he must consider that as a no. LOL WJ

Hi All

And by the way, none of this equates to PD calling me a coward since he did not respond to my last post!

Yet he has the nerve to accuse others for attacking him!

Also he never admited to accusing me falsely.

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 23 2009,15:04)

Hi PD I never said you were plagiarizing did I? Those are your words. Let your own conscience be your judge. You should know the difference in “quoting” works in your own words and copying whole paragraphs from a source without showing where it came from, or basically stealing an idea and changing it to claim it as your own works. And as far as David, Moses and Isaiah, you do leave the book chapter and verse after your quotes unless they are obvious don't you? Amazing! But, I forgive you for accusing me falsely anyway! Blessings WJ

If there is a Soap Opera it was created by him!

WJ

[Paladin]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 04 2009,06:10)

Hi ALL Quote (Paladin @ July 03 2009,13:31) I considered when I read it, that it is an agreement to NOT debate. Am I wrong? Anyone? Well, anyone except SOA. Isn't this classified as an “ad hominem fallacy”? More name calling? Is this a diversion from the questions concerning “The Christian Pioneer” again? These are my comments on the debate, time and date stamped which PD doesn't supply… Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 27 2009,15:43) I am not the slightest bit interested, mainly because you will make claims that the scriptures are corrupted by biased men, and it is not because I cannot make a valid argument about Biblical Monotheism in scriptures as being a Plural unity. Trinitarianism is the only view that takes all Biblical data without special pleading and shows that God is Plural yet One. Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 27 2009,23:34) I didn’t expect you to be surprised, I have explained my reasons. I tell you what though, I will agree to such a debate if you agree that we just use the versions of the Bible found on Biblegateway.com and Blueletterbible.org and just accept the written scriptures as they are, and just compare scripture to scripture. Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 27 2009,23:34) That is because I have dealt with people like you before and they always end up refuting the translations or claiming corruption or bias when presented with unambiguous truth that Jesus is God. So you want the debate fine, then we go by the rules that I mentioned and stick to the scriptures by letting them interpret themselves, but I will wait in line behind Thinker. How can it be any clearer that I would accept his debat based on the rules that I said. Since he is so adament about Jack following his premise whats wrong with him following mine? And since I said I will wait in line behind thinker, well he must consider that as a no. LOL WJ

Yah! Well, just go back to page two post 10 and see what order YOU plavced them in, and what order they were in when I quoted your post.

[KangarooJack]

Paladin,
Why haven't you answered the compelling evidnce against you in respect to plagiarism?

thinker

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Paladin @ July 03 2009,15:02)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 04 2009,06:10) Hi ALL Quote (Paladin @ July 03 2009,13:31) I considered when I read it, that it is an agreement to NOT debate. Am I wrong? Anyone? Well, anyone except SOA. Isn't this classified as an “ad hominem fallacy”? More name calling? Is this a diversion from the questions concerning “The Christian Pioneer” again? These are my comments on the debate, time and date stamped which PD doesn't supply… Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 27 2009,15:43) I am not the slightest bit interested, mainly because you will make claims that the scriptures are corrupted by biased men, and it is not because I cannot make a valid argument about Biblical Monotheism in scriptures as being a Plural unity. Trinitarianism is the only view that takes all Biblical data without special pleading and shows that God is Plural yet One. Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 27 2009,23:34) I didn’t expect you to be surprised, I have explained my reasons. I tell you what though, I will agree to such a debate if you agree that we just use the versions of the Bible found on Biblegateway.com and Blueletterbible.org and just accept the written scriptures as they are, and just compare scripture to scripture. Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 27 2009,23:34) That is because I have dealt with people like you before and they always end up refuting the translations or claiming corruption or bias when presented with unambiguous truth that Jesus is God. So you want the debate fine, then we go by the rules that I mentioned and stick to the scriptures by letting them interpret themselves, but I will wait in line behind Thinker. How can it be any clearer that I would accept his debat based on the rules that I said. Since he is so adament about Jack following his premise whats wrong with him following mine? And since I said I will wait in line behind thinker, well he must consider that as a no. LOL WJ Yah! Well, just go back to page two post 10 and see what order YOU plavced them in, and what order they were in when I quoted your post.

Hi PD

You once told me to do my own research.

Do you see the dates and the times on my post.

They do not lie!

WJ

[Paladin]

Quote (thethinker @ July 04 2009,07:13)

Paladin, Why haven't you answered the compelling evidnce against you in respect to plagiarism? thinker

Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha!

Com…. ha! Ha!

Compelling WHAT? Ha! Ha! Ha!

WJ scans the world wiode web and finds another site out of thousands, that agrees with my own study, and think he has ha! ha! EVIDENCE?

YOU TWO KATANJAMMER KIDS NEED A BREAK.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (thethinker @ July 03 2009,15:13)

Paladin, Why haven't you answered the compelling evidnce against you in respect to plagiarism? thinker

Hi Jack

I think he has given your answer! More name calling!

Amazing!

WJ

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Paladin @ July 03 2009,15:31)

Quote (thethinker @ July 04 2009,07:13) Paladin, Why haven't you answered the compelling evidnce against you in respect to plagiarism? thinker Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Com…. ha! Ha! Compelling WHAT? Ha! Ha! Ha! WJ scans the world wiode web and finds another site out of thousands, that agrees with my own study, and think he has ha! ha! EVIDENCE? YOU TWO KATANJAMMER KIDS NEED A BREAK.

Hi PD

So its just a coincedence that, The Christian poineer has “100 scriptural arguments for the Unitarian faith:–published in Boston, by the American Unitarian Association”, and your “100 Arguments for Monotheism being the focus of scripture” even though it is word for word for most of their arguments?

So do you still stand by your statement…

Quote (Paladin @ June 26 2009,13:12)

You do not see someone else's work in my posts at all.

WJ

[Paladin]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 04 2009,08:14)

Quote (Paladin @ July 03 2009,15:31) Quote (thethinker @ July 04 2009,07:13) Paladin, Why haven't you answered the compelling evidnce against you in respect to plagiarism? thinker Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Com…. ha! Ha! Compelling WHAT? Ha! Ha! Ha! WJ scans the world wiode web and finds another site out of thousands, that agrees with my own study, and think he has ha! ha! EVIDENCE? YOU TWO KATANJAMMER KIDS NEED A BREAK. Hi PD So its just a coincedence that, The Christian poineer has “100 scriptural arguments for the Unitarian faith:–published in Boston, by the American Unitarian Association”, and your “100 Arguments for Monotheism being the focus of scripture” even though it is word for word for most of their arguments? So do you still stand by your statement… Quote (Paladin @ June 26 2009,13:12) You do not see someone else's work in my posts at all. WJ

Hey WJ, thethinker just quit on the debate. Don't you think it is time you quit with your campaign of character assassination?

He really doesn't need your help anymore.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Paladin @ July 03 2009,16:36)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 04 2009,08:14) Quote (Paladin @ July 03 2009,15:31) Quote (thethinker @ July 04 2009,07:13) Paladin, Why haven't you answered the compelling evidnce against you in respect to plagiarism? thinker Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Com…. ha! Ha! Compelling WHAT? Ha! Ha! Ha! WJ scans the world wiode web and finds another site out of thousands, that agrees with my own study, and think he has ha! ha! EVIDENCE? YOU TWO KATANJAMMER KIDS NEED A BREAK. Hi PD So its just a coincedence that, The Christian poineer has “100 scriptural arguments for the Unitarian faith:–published in Boston, by the American Unitarian Association”, and your “100 Arguments for Monotheism being the focus of scripture” even though it is word for word for most of their arguments? So do you still stand by your statement… Quote (Paladin @ June 26 2009,13:12) You do not see someone else's work in my posts at all. WJ Hey WJ, thethinker just quit on the debate. Don't you think it is time you quit with your campaign of character assassination? He really doesn't need your help anymore.

HI PD

This isnt about him, this is about you!

I point out the truth and you call it character assassination!

It is you that has been doing the name calling PD!

WJ

[NickHassan]

Hi,
So the placement of punctuation marks by translators can affect the meaning.

[Paladin]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 04 2009,09:44)

Hi, So the placement of punctuation marks by translators can affect the meaning.

Very much so.

The difference of where a comma should be placed must come from the language in which it was written, not from the translation.

And the Greek did not have it, so if we are going to place a comma, it must be done with prayer and much consideration.

Look at the two offerings of Rom 9:5

This one speaks of Jesus as being God:
Romans 9:5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.

This one speaks of Jesus being over all God blessed, whcih is in keeping with the original language and other scripture.
Romans 9:5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all God blessed, for ever. Amen.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Paladin @ July 03 2009,18:14)

Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 04 2009,09:44) Hi, So the placement of punctuation marks by translators can affect the meaning. Very much so. The difference of where a comma should be placed must come from the language in which it was written, not from the translation. And the Greek did not have it, so if we are going to place a comma, it must be done with prayer and much consideration. Look at the two offerings of Rom 9:5 This one speaks of Jesus as being God: Romans 9:5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen. This one speaks of Jesus being over all God blessed, whcih is in keeping with the original language and other scripture. Romans 9:5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all God blessed, for ever. Amen.

Hi PD

Quote (Paladin @ July 03 2009,18:14)

This one speaks of Jesus being over all God blessed, whcih is in keeping with the original language and other scripture.

Really? There are other scriptures that call Jesus God.

Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised!* Amen. Rom 9:5

The subject is Jesus “who is over all!

So who is over all? And what was Pauls point in using the term “HUMAN ancestry”, why not just his “ancestry”?

It seems rather odd that Paul would use the terms for Jesus, “over all” and “human ancestry” if God in the same breath is the Father!

Or “the Christ, who is over all, God blessed forever,” or “the Messiah. God who is over all be blessed forever!” or “the Messiah who is over all. God be blessed forever!” The translational difficulty here is not text-critical in nature, but is a problem of punctuation. Since the genre of these opening verses of Romans 9 is a lament, it is probably best to take this as an affirmation of Christ’s deity (as the text renders it). Although the other renderings are possible, to see a note of praise to God at the end of this section seems strangely out of place. But for Paul to bring his lament to a crescendo (that is to say, his kinsmen had rejected God come in the flesh), thereby deepening his anguish, is wholly appropriate. This is also supported grammatically and stylistically: The phrase ὁ ὢν (Jo wn, “the one who is”) is most naturally taken as a phrase which modifies something in the preceding context, and Paul’s doxologies are always closely tied to the preceding context. For a detailed examination of this verse, see B. M. Metzger, “The Punctuation of Rom. 9:5,” Christ and the Spirit in the New Testament, 95-112; and M. J. Harris, Jesus as God, 144-72. Source

WJ

[NickHassan]

Hi WJ

1Cor8
“For US there is ONE GOD the Father……. and one Lord Jesus Christ.”

But you have two Gods do you?

[KangarooJack]

Quote (Paladin @ July 04 2009,07:31)

Quote (thethinker @ July 04 2009,07:13) Paladin, Why haven't you answered the compelling evidnce against you in respect to plagiarism? thinker Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Com…. ha! Ha! Compelling WHAT? Ha! Ha! Ha! WJ scans the world wiode web and finds another site out of thousands, that agrees with my own study, and think he has ha! ha! EVIDENCE? YOU TWO KATANJAMMER KIDS NEED A BREAK.

Paladin,

This was more than “agreement.” It was word for word. How likely is that? I want to remind you that plagiarism is prohibited in the rules of this board and is against the law in my part of the world. Hopefully enough negative has come to you that you will not do it again.

thinker

[NickHassan]

Hi TT,
Silly stuff really.
Have you got to look at Acts 10.38 for us yet?

[KangarooJack]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 04 2009,11:03)

Hi TT, Silly stuff really. Have you got to look at Acts 10.38 for us yet?

Nick,
What does Acts 10:38 have to do with this discussion?

thinker

[Paladin]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 04 2009,10:45)

[/quote] Quote (Paladin @ July 03 2009,18:14) Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 04 2009,09:44) Hi, So the placement of punctuation marks by translators can affect the meaning. (P) Very much so. The difference of where a comma should be placed must come from the language in which it was written, not from the translation. And the Greek did not have it, so if we are going to place a comma, it must be done with prayer and much consideration. Look at the two offerings of Rom 9:5 This one speaks of Jesus as being God: Romans 9:5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen. This one speaks of Jesus being over all God blessed, whcih is in keeping with the original language and other scripture. Romans 9:5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all God blessed, for ever. Amen. (WJ) Hi PD Quote (Paladin @ July 03 2009,18:14) This one speaks of Jesus being over all God blessed, whcih is in keeping with the original language and other scripture. (WJ) Really? There are other scriptures that call Jesus God. Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised!* Amen. Rom 1:5 (P) Really? Hmmmm!!! Rom 1:5 By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name: The subject is Jesus “who is over all! So who is over all? And what was Pauls point in using the term “HUMAN ancestry”, why not just his “ancestry”? It seems rather odd that Paul would use the terms for Jesus, “over all” and “human ancestry” if God in the same breath is the Father!

Not at all. You can milk the internet for almost any statement you need to find in scripture. The problem remains, it is not in the Greek, so you waste our time.

I think you are misreferencing your material. Your reference is NOT Rom 1:5.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Hi PD

Quote (Paladin @ July 03 2009,21:17)

Not at all. You can milk the internet for almost any statement you need to find in scripture. The problem remains, it is not in the Greek, so you waste our time.

Yea, I know what you mean about milking the internet.

But I do give my sources and do not pretend the material is mine!

I don't claim to have all knowledge.

So thank God he has given us access to an unlimited amount of resources so that we may through the Spirit equip ourselves with the truth so we can stand against false prophets, and deceivers that parade themselves as sheep but inwardly they are ravening wolves that seek to kill, steal and destroy.

For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist. 2 John 1:7

Quote (Paladin @ July 03 2009,21:17)

Not at all. You can milk the internet for almost any statement you need to find in scripture. The problem remains, it is not in the Greek, so you waste our time.

What is not in the Greek? The commas? We have gone over that, but the evidence leans toward the subject being Jesus who is “Over All”. That is in the Greek!

Why, is there something wrong with my source?

Or “the Christ, who is over all, God blessed forever,” or “the Messiah. God who is over all be blessed forever!” or “the Messiah who is over all. God be blessed forever!” The translational difficulty here is not text-critical in nature, but is a problem of punctuation. Since the genre of these opening verses of Romans 9 is a lament, it is probably best to take this as an affirmation of Christ’s deity (as the text renders it). Although the other renderings are possible, to see a note of praise to God at the end of this section seems strangely out of place. But for Paul to bring his lament to a crescendo (that is to say, his kinsmen had rejected God come in the flesh), thereby deepening his anguish, is wholly appropriate. This is also supported grammatically and stylistically: The phrase ὁ ὢν (Jo wn, “the one who is”) is most naturally taken as a phrase which modifies something in the preceding context, and Paul’s doxologies are always closely tied to the preceding context. For a detailed examination of this verse, see B. M. Metzger, “The Punctuation of Rom. 9:5,” Christ and the Spirit in the New Testament, 95-112; and M. J. Harris, Jesus as God, 144-72. Source

WJ

[Paladin]

Quote (thethinker @ July 04 2009,11:00)

Quote (Paladin @ July 04 2009,07:31) Quote (thethinker @ July 04 2009,07:13) Paladin, Why haven't you answered the compelling evidnce against you in respect to plagiarism? thinker Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Com…. ha! Ha! Compelling WHAT? Ha! Ha! Ha! WJ scans the world wiode web and finds another site out of thousands, that agrees with my own study, and think he has ha! ha! EVIDENCE? YOU TWO KATANJAMMER KIDS NEED A BREAK. Paladin, This was more than “agreement.” It was word for word. How likely is that? I want to remind you that plagiarism is prohibited in the rules of this board and is against the law in my part of the world. Hopefully enough negative has come to you that you will not do it again. thinker

I want to remind YOU that lying is against the board rules, and attacking fellow posters is against the rules. Perhaps you have learned your lesson and will refrain from continuing such behaviour, and will not do it again.

[Author]

Posts